ASA Rating for RED?

[Ryan Sims]

Has anyone heard of what the sensitive of the RED sensor will be in the range of ASA(ISO)? How fast of lens do I need to buy? How big of a lighting package will I need?

[Stephen Williams]

Has anyone heard of what the sensitive of the RED sensor will be in the range of ASA(ISO)? How fast of lens do I need to buy? How big of a lighting package will I need?

Hi,

David Stump's tests implied a sensor rating of 320 asa, assuming you have a scene with a dynamic range of 8.5 stops. (There was a problem with the processing of the images, they should have had a range of over 11 stops).

If you set a light meter to 320 asa you should be safe with +/- 5 stops from there, however if your highlights are only + 3 stops (spot meter) it would be better to rate the sensor 2 stops lower. Like in digital still photography expose to the right.

Clearly I have never shot with a Red camera and my logic is based on using a Viper & DSLR's.

As for size of lighting package, it would be the same as shooting on film, based on the ASA rating of your choice. I have almost been caught out shooting with a Viper (film stream), by the amount of light required! Any one who says you need less light than for film has clearly not worked with both mediums.

Stephen

[Ryan Sims]

Stephen,
Thanks for shedding some light on the sensitivity rating. Anything above 200 ASA sounds fantastic for a 4K sensor.

[S. Um]

As for size of lighting package, it would be the same as shooting on film, based on the ASA rating of your choice. I have almost been caught out shooting with a Viper (film stream), by the amount of light required! Any one who says you need less light than for film has clearly not worked with both mediums.

If a video camera and a certain film has the same ASA rating, then by definition they require the same amount of light to get the same (good) exposure. Some people may think that video requires less light because you can use gain in video but not in film.

[Ralph Oshiro]

Personally, I would find the standard video camera sensitivity nomenclature (e.g., f/x @ 2,000 lux), with its correlating signal-to-noise ratio specification, more relevant than an ASA rating. For example, f/11 @ 2,000 lux with a 65dB signal-to-noise ratio is what my Sony DSR450 sees at, and that things sees in the dark virtually noise-free!

[Stephen Williams]

If a video camera and a certain film has the same ASA rating, then by definition they require the same amount of light to get the same (good) exposure. Some people may think that video requires less light because you can use gain in video but not in film.

Hi,

If you re read what I wrote you will realise I don't agree with you. Up until last week I would have agreed in principle with what you said.

CCD's don't have an ASA rating so cant be directly compared to film.

Stephen

[Ken Corben]

I wonder if all lux/ASA ratiings and metering will be sans red camera control? In other words all f stop and external filter no in camera exposure step control.

[Michael Brennan]

Little late on this thread.
To achieve the same depth of field as 35mm, a 2/3 inch system requires less light.
That is not to say you need less numbers of lights or that less light is needed to balance daylight.

Both will get an exposure under crummy low light situations such as street lighting, but the 2/3 inch will have more depth of field.

Red enables best of both worlds.

Mike

[I Bloom]

I wonder if all lux/ASA ratiings and metering will be sans red camera control? In other words all f stop and external filter no in camera exposure step control.

They have yet to specify if the gain can be adjusted on the chip thus changing the sensitivity. My hunch is that it cannot as this might simplify the electronics and lead to a lower noise floor (would it? I've been reading up on CCD's and assuming that the Mysterium is a "frame transfer" CCD, but I can't tell if this is completely true.) But since the camera appears to have a deep toe, bringing up a dark image in post should be more possible. In comparison to bumping the gain, this means more posturization but less noise. Pick your poison.

It doesn't seem from the renderings and photos that the camera has internal ND filters. Its possible that the only way to control exposure in camera will be shutter and frame rate. So you might want to look into buying some ND's and a matte box. Start thinking of this thing like its an 435 not and HVX.

Anyways how often when shooting film do we really want to be over 250 ASA, 200 to 320 on digital with almost no noise is like butter.

Ian Bloom

[Michael Hastings]

Red Mysterium is CMOS not CCD - completely different technology.

BTW I agree with the sentiment that they should give us a broadcast type spec where you say F11 at 2000 lux or whatever - that could be reasonably compared with other technology.

They have yet to specify if the gain can be adjusted on the chip thus changing the sensitivity. My hunch is that it cannot as this might simplify the electronics and lead to a lower noise floor (would it? I've been reading up on CCD's and assuming that the Mysterium is a "frame transfer" CCD, but I can't tell if this is completely true.) But since the camera appears to have a deep toe, bringing up a dark image in post should be more possible. In comparison to bumping the gain, this means more posturization but less noise. Pick your poison.

It doesn't seem from the renderings and photos that the camera has internal ND filters. Its possible that the only way to control exposure in camera will be shutter and frame rate. So you might want to look into buying some ND's and a matte box. Start thinking of this thing like its an 435 not and HVX.

Anyways how often when shooting film do we really want to be over 250 ASA, 200 to 320 on digital with almost no noise is like butter.

Ian Bloom